Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:04

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 14:58 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 21:39
Posts: 140
Location: St Annes
Lancashire have been having a bit of a blitz on speed traps recently, especially the police in Blackpool.

So wasn't much of a surprise to see this in the local Blackpool Gazette

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/business/warning-to-people-who-alert-drivers-of-speed-traps-1-4634982


I should also be able to give a review of the current Lancashire speed awareness course, assuming I'm offered it - 36 in a 30 :(
It's about 8yrs since I last did it when it was only offered to those caught at 35 (or maybe 36), any other speed and you got the points and fine. Now you get offered the course for

Speed Limit Speed Awareness
30 mph 36/37/38/39/40/41/42
40 mph 47/48/49/50/51/52/53
50 mph 58/59/60/61/62/63/64


Last edited by cerberus on Tue Jun 12, 2012 15:18, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 15:16 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
"Misuse of headlights", huh?

I'm not sure that this is a actual offence but, putting this aside, is "misuse" the act of warning drivers of a hazard for which they may have to slow suddenly?

This is the usual bluster put out by SCPs to try to intimidate people.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 15:41 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9273
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
malcolmw wrote:
"Misuse of headlights", huh?

I'm not sure that this is a actual offence but, putting this aside, is "misuse" the act of warning drivers of a hazard for which they may have to slow suddenly?

This is the usual bluster put out by SCPs to try to intimidate people.



Similar guff to that put out by SCP that their vans are positioned so as to be highly visible. Then some I've seen /heard about - one on the A46 near Warwick ,on a bridge over the DC - looking into a bend .One on the A74, similar position . Leics used to position one near to the Narborough turn-off( A5), highly visible from one direction ,but hidden behind a large road sign, and the Northern Partnership placement near Loch linnhe ,on one of the only decent straights in the area ,but hidden ,again round a bend. Odds on that "enforcement " position is first point where van can see you ,not vice versa .
New language talked by SCP spokespersons, it's double talk .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 21:25 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
So exactly what is the, (legal), use of the 'flash headlamps' function?

I always thought, or read long ago, that It's to let others know of your presence; the visual equivalent of the horn.

If so, since when can 'they' prosecute me on their assumption of my motive for using it?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 17:06 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9273
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Big Tone wrote:
So exactly what is the, (legal), use of the 'flash headlamps' function?

I always thought, or read long ago, that It's to let others know of your presence; the visual equivalent of the horn.

If so, since when can 'they' prosecute me on their assumption of my motive for using it?


Brought back memories,and a quick google later of

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camer ... php?id=115

"Judges support trucker who warned traffic to speed trap
Published: 14th October 2005
Category: Prosecution
Reader's Rage:
A lorry driver who was prosecuted for obstructing police by alerting other motorists to a speed trap by waving out of his cab has won a battle to clear his name.

When the police, who were manning the speed trap on the A303 at Tinkers Hill in Somerset last year, saw Charles Glendinning pass by they gave chase and reported him. He was summoned to court and convicted of obstructing the police in the execution of their duty. However, Mr Glendinning appealed and Taunton Crown Court overturned the conviction.

But that wasn't the end of it because the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) appealed against the previous court ruling and the case was heard in the High Court. Luckily for Mr Glendinning the High Court judges ruled in his favour and pointed "some might think the police would appreciate the efforts of other to prevent speeding.

The judge said that there was no evidence that any of the motorists warned by Mr Glendinning had been breaking the speed limit at the time. Earlier the judge asked the CPS what the difference was between Mr Glendinning's action and road signs warning of speed cameras ahead. The response came from Ben Tabiner who said they were two completely different strategies - warning signs are preventative while a speed trap is specifically to catch people.

The High Court judges agreed that because there was no evidence that any other drivers in the area were influenced by Mr Glendinning's signal and slowed down as a result, he did not obstruct the police."


Comment on the site was :-
Information sourced in part or in full from: Daily Mail
Our comment: More likely the police were upset that Mr Glendinning were scaring the fish away from the fishing net. They had caught 60 motorists speeding on the 70mph road in just one hour. That's ?3600 for an hour's work.


Edit -The appeal was a decision at a Crown Court -
( Q for the legal eagles ) -does that make it case law ?

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 19:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7361
Location: Highlands
I have been trying very hard to locate this offence from the Road Traffic Offenders Act 88 :
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/contents
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/12
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/198 ... 053_en.pdf
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/198 ... ts/enacted

Reference to 'an Act' numbered 106 here : http://www.106owners.co.uk/forums/showt ... Lights-%28 (16.4.09)
But when looking in the Act there is no (longer) any 106 !?

I am now looking in here for further possible references :
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/AdvancedSea ... ext=Lights

If anyone can find it please add in a link ! :)

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 13:19 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
You should not misunderstand the Gledinning ruling.

Quote:
The High Court judges agreed that because there was no evidence that any other drivers in the area were influenced by Mr Glendinning's signal and slowed down as a result, he did not obstruct the police.


IF drivers HAD been speeding, and slowed down as a result of Glendinning's actions, he WOULD have been guilty of obstructing the police.

Similarly, drivers ARE misusing their lights if they are not "alerting other drivers to their presence."

However, it would be unfortunate if you went to indicate or flick your wipers and inadvertently chose the wrong switch!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 20:52 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9273
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Ernest Marsh wrote:
You should not misunderstand the Gledinning ruling.

Quote:
The High Court judges agreed that because there was no evidence that any other drivers in the area were influenced by Mr Glendinning's signal and slowed down as a result, he did not obstruct the police.


IF drivers HAD been speeding, and slowed down as a result of Glendinning's actions, he WOULD have been guilty of obstructing the police.


I think that was the thing that riled the police ( or was it SCP,who love to hide behind guidelines ,as submarines hide beneath the surface, but get hot under the collar when their scheming gets shown up as a sham, or a money making scam).

Similarly, drivers ARE misusing their lights if they are not "alerting other drivers to their presence."
[quote="Ernest Marsh"
However, it would be unfortunate if you went to indicate or flick your wipers and inadvertently chose the wrong switch!

[/quote]

But then .perhaps we should adopt a policy of driving with dipped lights on ( in the interests of safety ,"you know " ) and for a set period after a speed trap ,switch them off. :loco:

Did ,you by any chance miss the :shock: when you posted that Ernest?

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 08:06 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Round our way people move their sunvisors up and down rapidly when approaching a speed trap....what's the law for that?...inappropriate use of a sun visor?...;-)

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:30 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7361
Location: Highlands
I have now contacted the Lancs Police and this is the conversation (so far) :
Quote:
Hello Claire,

Lancashire Constabulary will shortly be making a statement in relation to the incidents you have referenced below. The statement will be made via the Lancashire Constabulary Website in due course.
Thank you

Alan Fenton
Customer Services Department
Lancashire Constabulary
Greenbank Whitebirk Drive Blackburn BB1 3HT
Tel: 01254 353475
Email: CSD@lancashire.pnn.police.uk

From: carmstrong [mailto:carmstrong@safespeed.org.uk]
Sent: 14 June 2012 13:45
To: LancashirePolice
Subject: Misuse of Lights

Dear Sir/Madam

With reference to this item on your webpage :
http://www.lancashire.police.uk/news/mo ... eed-checks

Please can you point me to the precise Road Traffic Act for this 'misuse of lights' offence.

Yours sincerely,
Claire Armstrong
Safe Speed
Interesting !? If all that there is, is a guide within the Highway Code then I cannot see that they can prosecute those drivers ... for making others 'aware of their presence'.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:43 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
That was my point too Claire. As I said "I always thought, or read long ago, that It's to let others know of your presence; the visual equivalent of the horn. If so, since when can 'they' prosecute me on their assumption of my motive for using it?"

Sounds like an abuse of power to me; and an illegal one on their part at that! Unless anyone knows differently?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 22:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 19:11
Posts: 172
Location: Southampton
Ernest Marsh wrote:
You should not misunderstand the Gledinning ruling.

Quote:
The High Court judges agreed that because there was no evidence that any other drivers in the area were influenced by Mr Glendinning's signal and slowed down as a result, he did not obstruct the police.


IF drivers HAD been speeding, and slowed down as a result of Glendinning's actions, he WOULD have been guilty of obstructing the police.

Similarly, drivers ARE misusing their lights if they are not "alerting other drivers to their presence."

However, it would be unfortunate if you went to indicate or flick your wipers and inadvertently chose the wrong switch!


But as I read the judgement he would only have been guilty if the police could prove that the motorists he had flashed had actually been speeding.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 22:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 19:11
Posts: 172
Location: Southampton
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
I have now contacted the Lancs Police and this is the conversation (so far) :
Quote:
Hello Claire,

Lancashire Constabulary will shortly be making a statement in relation to the incidents you have referenced below. The statement will be made via the Lancashire Constabulary Website in due course.
Thank you

Alan Fenton
Customer Services Department
Lancashire Constabulary
Greenbank Whitebirk Drive Blackburn BB1 3HT
Tel: 01254 353475
Email: CSD@lancashire.pnn.police.uk

From: carmstrong [mailto:carmstrong@safespeed.org.uk]
Sent: 14 June 2012 13:45
To: LancashirePolice
Subject: Misuse of Lights

Dear Sir/Madam

With reference to this item on your webpage :
http://www.lancashire.police.uk/news/mo ... eed-checks

Please can you point me to the precise Road Traffic Act for this 'misuse of lights' offence.

Yours sincerely,
Claire Armstrong
Safe Speed
Interesting !? If all that there is, is a guide within the Highway Code then I cannot see that they can prosecute those drivers ... for making others 'aware of their presence'.


An interesting reply. If they made a statement they should know from where their reference came. Sounds like a bit of stalling to me while they can think something up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 09:15 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
graball wrote:
Round our way people move their sunvisors up and down rapidly when approaching a speed trap....what's the law for that?...inappropriate use of a sun visor?...;-)

..or failing to have proper control of a motor vehicle.
They rarely make any attempt to PROVE that you could not control - the court simply rubber stamps their claim, after all - are the magistrates going to adjourn to a test track to watch you PROVE that you could control the vehicle?? Of course not!

whynot wrote:
Ernest Marsh wrote:
You should not misunderstand the Gledinning ruling.

Quote:
The High Court judges agreed that because there was no evidence that any other drivers in the area were influenced by Mr Glendinning's signal and slowed down as a result, he did not obstruct the police.


IF drivers HAD been speeding, and slowed down as a result of Glendinning's actions, he WOULD have been guilty of obstructing the police.

Similarly, drivers ARE misusing their lights if they are not "alerting other drivers to their presence."

However, it would be unfortunate if you went to indicate or flick your wipers and inadvertently chose the wrong switch!


But as I read the judgement he would only have been guilty if the police could prove that the motorists he had flashed had actually been speeding.

Correct - but of course they should be able to show that they caught the other driver speeding - in which case it could be argued that the other driver failed to see any warning...!
It would be interesting to hear the court's verdict on THAT scenario. :)

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 03:50 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7361
Location: Highlands
Certainly no further announcement has been forthcoming ! (So far - maybe Monday?)

Perhaps one might consider an argument; that the driver was alerting him to their presence (all fair enough) and then that it was only a hand gesture that might indicate 'something' - there is no 'misuse' of a hand gesture. ;)
There are hand signals obviously but ... isn't this all getting somewhat petty ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 20:42 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9273
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
There are hand signals obviously but ... isn't this all getting somewhat petty ?


Certainly is in the part of some SCP. On Friday evening, I took my son to pick up his kids from his previous paerners place.On way ,spotted a large van parked in a layby, partially hidden bu trees. Alarm bells rung, and sure enough ,it was el SCP ,at 1830, parked about 700 yds into a :30: .Even from about 400 yds, and knowing it was there, van was hard to spot.
If it is as they claim"all about safety " - van would be placed to act as a deterrent, not hidden in the undergrowth.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 21:07 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7361
Location: Highlands
It's a bit of a side issue but did you take a 'distant' photo of it by any chance ? I'm sure the speed cameras website would be most interested ! I would mind having a copy either ... (trying to work on the new webpages).

I hope they will make their statement on Monday ... !

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 20:52 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 19:11
Posts: 172
Location: Southampton
Quote:
I hope they will make their statement on Monday ... !


It appears not. I wonder why?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 23:07 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9273
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
It's a bit of a side issue but did you take a 'distant' photo of it by any chance ? I'm sure the speed cameras website would be most interested ! I would mind having a copy either ... (trying to work on the new webpages).

I hope they will make their statement on Monday ... !


YHM

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 00:49 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7361
Location: Highlands
Wow that image clearly shows how hidden s/he was ! Certainly no deterrent ! Also as the small downhill might help send people over by a crucial mile an hour it may increase their NIP numbers !

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.366s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]